Last week, President Barack Obama presented the administration’s plan to cut carbon emissions from existing power plants, seeking a 30 percent reduction in the nation by 2030.

Eighty-two percent of greenhouse gas pollution, which causes temperatures to rise, comes from carbon dioxide in the U.S., and this is produced primarily through the burning of fossil fuels — coal, natural gas, oil — solid waste, trees and wood products.

Therefore, cutting carbon emissions from existing power plants seems like a logical place to start.

Predictably, both sides of the debate jumped on the issue. Critics say the plan will lead to increases in utility rates and job losses, especially for those businesses that need lots of affordable energy. Proponents point to health issues and climate dangers, such as higher temperatures, rising seas and more intense storms.

What we need, though, are innovative ideas and new approaches that would allow us to clean up the air without hurting the economy instead of rhetoric and hot air.

For example, the Citizens’ Climate Lobby has proposed what it says is an economic solution, not an environmental solution.

It proposes a national tax on the carbon dioxide content of fossil fuels burned, starting at $10 per metric ton of carbon dioxide a year and increasing by $10 a ton each year.

All of the money from this tax would be divided into equal shares and returned to each household, with one share for each adult and a half share per child up to a maximum of two. By 2025, the study estimates, a family of four will get a check for almost $300 a month.

As the tax increases and companies reduce their reliance on fossil fuels, the Regional Economic Models Inc. estimates it would lead to 2.2 million jobs over 10 years. Greenhouse gas emissions would be cut by 33 percent by 2025, five years ahead of the Environmental Protection Agency goal, and 52 percent by 2035.

The editorial board has some questions about the proposal and the very word “tax” makes this plan a nonstarter for some, but the Citizens’ Climate Lobby proposal is the kind of thinking that needs to be encouraged if we want to address pollution and climate change issues.

We need to look at new ways and new incentives to reduce emissions that pollute our area. The EPA plan is expected to be finalized by June 2015 and state plans are due by June 2016. So we have time and some flexibility in looking for innovative ways to reduce emissions

We live in a state where burning coal accounted for 51 percent of the state’s electricity production in 2012, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. In its “State of the Air 2014” report, the American Lung Association gave Brown County a D for its ozone levels. Kewaunee, Manitowoc and Sheboygan counties received F’s.

As part of the EPA’s Clean Power Plan, states can design a program for meeting their goals, and they can work with other states to coordination reductions. This type of flexibility might let Wisconsin account for any cross-border pollution, especially the kind seen along the lakeshore.

Even if you don’t buy into the climate change debate, you should be worried about air pollution and the more immediate impact it can have on our lives and the lives of our children and grandchildren.